Mordecai refused to reverence Haman. The religion of a
Jew forbade him to give honours to any mortal man which savoured of idolatry,
especially to so wicked a man as Haman. By nature all are idolaters; self is
our favourite idol, we are pleased to be treated as if every thing were at our
disposal. Though religion by no means destroys good manners, but teaches us to
render honour to whom honour is due, yet by a citizen of Zion, not only in his
heart, but in his eyes, such a vile person as Haman was, is contemned, Psalm 15:4. The true believer cannot obey
edicts, or conform to fashions, which break the law of God. He must obey God
rather than man, and leave the consequences to him. Haman was full of wrath.
His device was inspired by that wicked spirit, who has been a murderer from the
beginning; whose enmity to Christ and his church, governs all his children.

Without some acquaintance with the human heart, and the
history of mankind, we should not think that any prince could consent to a
dreadful proposal, so hurtful to himself. Let us be thankful for mild and just
government. Haman inquires, according to his own superstitions, how to find a
lucky day for the designed massacre! God's wisdom serves its own purposes by
men's folly. Haman has appealed to the lot, and the lot, by delaying the
execution, gives judgment against him. The event explains the doctrine of a
particular providence over all the affairs of men, and the care of God over his
church. Haman was afraid lest the king's conscience should smite him for what
he had done; to prevent which, he kept him drinking. This cursed method many
often take to drown convictions, and to harden their own hearts, and the hearts
of others, in sin. All appeared in a favourable train to accomplish the
project. But though sinners are permitted to proceed to the point they aim at,
an unseen but almighty Power turns them back. How vain and contemptible are the
strongest assaults against Jehovah! Had Haman obtained his wish, and the Jewish
nation perished, what must have become of all the promises? How could the
prophecies concerning the great Redeemer of the world have been fulfilled? Thus
the everlasting covenant itself must have failed, before this diabolical
project could take place.

──Matthew Henry《Concise Commentary on Esther》

Esther 3

Verse 1

[1] After these things did king Ahasuerus promote Haman the
son of Hammedatha the Agagite, and advanced him, and set his seat above all the
princes that were with him.

Agagite — An Amalekite of the royal seed of that nation, whose
kings were successively called Agag.

All the princes — Gave him the first place and
seat, which was next to the king.

Verse 2

[2] And all the king's servants, that were in the king's
gate, bowed, and reverenced Haman: for the king had so commanded concerning
him. But Mordecai bowed not, nor did him reverence.

But, … — Probably the worship required was not only civil, but
Divine: which as the kings of Persia arrogated to themselves, so they did
sometimes impart this honour to some of their chief favourites, that they
should be adored in like manner. And that it was so here, seems more than
probable, because it was superfluous, to give an express command to all the
kings servants, to pay a civil respect to so great a prince, which of course
they used, and therefore a Divine honour must be here intended. And that a Jew
should deny this honour, is not strange, seeing the wise Grecians did
positively refuse to give this honour to the kings of Persia themselves, even
when they were to make their addresses to them: and one Timocrates was put to
death by the Athenians for worshipping Darius in that manner.

Verse 4

[4] Now it came to pass, when they spake daily unto him, and
he hearkened not unto them, that they told Haman, to see whether Mordecai's
matters would stand: for he had told them that he was a Jew.

To see — What the event of it would be.

For, … — And therefore did not deny this reverence out of
pride, but merely out of conscience.

Verse 6

[6] And he thought scorn to lay hands on Mordecai alone; for
they had shewed him the people of Mordecai: wherefore Haman sought to destroy
all the Jews that were throughout the whole kingdom of Ahasuerus, even the
people of Mordecai.

Scorn — He thought that vengeance was unsuitable to his
quality.

Destroy — Which he attempted, from that implacable hatred which,
as an Amalekite, he had against them; from his rage against Mordecai; and from
Mordecai's reason of this contempt, because he was a Jew, which as he truly
judged, extended itself to all the Jews, and would equally engage them all in
the same neglect. And doubtless Haman included those who were returned to their
own land: for that was now a province of his kingdom.

Verse 7

[7] In the first month, that is, the month Nisan, in the twelfth
year of king Ahasuerus, they cast Pur, that is, the lot, before Haman from day
to day, and from month to month, to the twelfth month, that is, the month Adar.

They cast — The diviners cast lots, according
to the custom of those people, what day, and what month would be most lucky,
not for his success with the king (of which he made no doubt) but for the most
effectual extirpation of the Jews. Wherein appears likewise both his implacable
malice, and unwearied diligence in seeking vengeance of them with so much
trouble to himself; and God's singular providence in disposing the lot to that
time, that the Jews might have space to get the decree reversed.

Verse 11

[11] And the king said unto Haman, The silver is given to
thee, the people also, to do with them as it seemeth good to thee.

The silver — Keep it to thy own use; I accept
the offer for the deed.

Verse 15

[15] The posts went out, being hastened by the king's
commandment, and the decree was given in Shushan the palace. And the king and
Haman sat down to drink; but the city Shushan was perplexed.

The city — Not only the Jews, but a great number of the citizens,
either because they were related to them, or engaged with them in worldly
concerns; or out of humanity and compassion toward so vast a number of innocent
people, appointed as sheep for the slaughter.

Matthew Henry says:
“I wonder what the king saw in man that was commendable or meritorious? It is
plain that he was not a man of honour or justice, of any true courage or steady
conduct, but proud and passionate and revengeful; yet he was promoted and
caressed, and there was none as great as he. Princes’ darlings are not always
worthies.”

I. The wicked man
in prosperity. Haman is typical. He is the progenitor of a long line that by
skilful plotting rise above the heads of superior men. In this world rewards
are not rightly administered. Push and tact get the prize.

II. The prosperous
wicked man is surrounded by fawning sycophants. “The king had so commanded.” A
king’s commandment is not required to secure outward homage towards those in
high places. Clothe a man with the outward marks of royal favour, and many are
at once prepared to become his blind adulators. Imperialism is glorified in
political, literary, and ecclesiastical spheres. Power in arms, push in
business, skill in politics, success in literature, and parade in religion are
the articles of the creed in which modem society believes.

III. The prosperous
wicked man is surrounded by meddling sycophants. Even admirers may be too
officious. If Haman had known and seen all, he might have prayed, “Save me from
my friends.” The king’s servants, in their selfish zeal, frustrated their own
purposes of aggrandisement. How often in trying to grasp too much we lose all.

IV. The prosperous
wicked man finds that false, greatness brings trouble. That greatness is false
which is not the outcome of goodness. The course of wicked prosperity cannot
run smooth. Haman meets with the checking and detecting Mordecai.

V. The prosperous
wicked man may learn that an unrestrained nature brings trouble. Haman was
intoxicated with his greatness. He was full of wrath. Wrath is cruel both to
the subject and the object.

VI. The prosperous
wicked man unwittingly plots his own downfall. Haman’s wrath led him to
dangerous extremes. Poor Haman! Already we see thee treading on a volcano. Thy
hands are digging the pit into which thou shalt fall. Thy minions are preparing
the gallows on which thou thyself shalt be hung. Learn--

1. Prosperity has its drawbacks.

2. “Better it is to be of a humble spirit with the lowly than to
divide the spoil with the proud.”

I. The insecurity
of earthly greatness. The king in this story was exposed to the plot of Bigthan
and Teresh. From it he was saved by the intervention of Mordecai, though by and
by to fall beneath the assassin’s blow. Great are the perils of the great.
Their lives often, behind all the splendour that takes the public eye, a sad
story.

II. The divine
foresight of and preparation for coming evil. The plotters, Bigthan and Teresh,
paid the penalty with their lives. But what had that plot to do with the great
story of this book--Israel’s deliverance from Haman? Much, for mark, the plot
was detected by Mordecai. The news was conveyed to Esther, and by her to the
king. Thus God’s design for Israel’s deliverance precedes Haman’s design for
Israel’s destruction Oh! the Divine preparations! How God goes before us! Does
Jacob look round upon famished Canaan? Lo! by the hand of long-lost Joseph, God
has prepared for him a house in Egypt. Do we come into peril? Before we reach
it God has been preparing for us a way of escape. His love is older than our
sin--than all sin.

III. The dignity of
conscientiousness in little things. Mordecai would not bow to Haman. Not from
disloyalty. He had stood by the king and saved him from the plotted death.
Because--this is the reason he gave--because he was a Jew: and Haman, he knew, was the Jews’ enemy.
Others bowed--he could not. A little thing, do you say, to bow to Haman? but s
little thing may have much effect onothers, as this had on Haman--on ourselves;
and, often repeated, is not little in its influence. He had conscience in this
matter, and to defile it had not been a little harm. Conscience can appear in
little things, but it deems nothing little that affects it, that expresses it.
The early Christians would rather die than cast a few idolatrous grains of
incense into the fire. Many an English martyr went to theprison and the stake
rather than bow down to the wafer-god of Romanism. In little things, as some
would deem them, we can take a stand for Christ.

IV. The wickedness
of revenge. Had Haman a just grudge against Mordecai? Let him have the matter
out with Mordecai alone? No; that will not suit him. He would punish a whole
nation. The proud became the revengeful. If a man is humble and has a lowly
estimate of himself, he will bear in silence the contempt and unkindness of
men. But pride is easily wounded--sees slights often where none were intended.
On a great platform we see, in the case of Haman, to what sin wounded pride
will hurry a man. And to what a doom! We need to beware. Are none of us ever
tempted harshly to judge a whole family because of the conduct of one of its
members? to say, in the spirit of Haman, he is bad--the whole lot is bad? “Hath
any wronged thee?” says Quarles, “be bravely revenged; slight it, and the work
is begun; forgive it, and the work is finished.”

V. The patience of
faith. The king’s life had been saved by Mordecai. But no honour had come to
him for the service--no reward. And now an edict is out against him and his
nation, dooming them all to death. And does he regret the stand that he has
taken? Does he loudly complain of the king’s ingratitude? He keeps silence. God
will think on him for good. Oh, troubled one I oh, darkened life! oh, soul tempest-tossed,
“only believe.” The clouds will pass--will melt into the eternal blue!(G.
T. Coster.)

Haman and Mordecai

1. It shows in a lurid but striking manner the diabolical character
of revenge. Pride is pride, and revenge is revenge in quality, although they
only show themselves in words with little stings in them, and by insinuations
that have no known ground of verity. If we do not make it our business to
chastise our spirits and purify them from the seeds and shadows of these vices,
in the forms in which they can assail us, can we be quite sure that if we were
on the wider stage, and had the ampler opportunity, we should not be as this
devilish Amalekite?

2. A lesson of personal independence. What meanness there is in this
country in bowing down to rank! in letting some lordly title stand in the place
of an argument! in seeking high patronage for good schemes, as men seek the
shadow of broad trees on hot days! in running after royal carriages! in
subservience to power, and adulation of wealth! Rise up, Mordecai, in thy
Jewish grandeur, and shame us into manliness, and help us to stand a little
more erect!

3. Finally, a lesson of patience and quietness to all the faithful.
Obey conscience, honour the right, and then fear no evil. Is the storm brewing?
It may break and carry much away, but it will not hurt you. A little reputation
is not you. A little property is not you. Health even is not you, nor is life
itself. The wildest storm that could blow would only cast you on the shores of
eternal peace and safety. But more probably the storm may melt all away in a
while and leave you in wonder at your own fears. (A. Raleigh, D. D.)

Matthew Henry says:
“I wonder what the king saw in man that was commendable or meritorious? It is
plain that he was not a man of honour or justice, of any true courage or steady
conduct, but proud and passionate and revengeful; yet he was promoted and
caressed, and there was none as great as he. Princes’ darlings are not always
worthies.”

I. The wicked man
in prosperity. Haman is typical. He is the progenitor of a long line that by
skilful plotting rise above the heads of superior men. In this world rewards
are not rightly administered. Push and tact get the prize.

II. The prosperous
wicked man is surrounded by fawning sycophants. “The king had so commanded.” A
king’s commandment is not required to secure outward homage towards those in
high places. Clothe a man with the outward marks of royal favour, and many are
at once prepared to become his blind adulators. Imperialism is glorified in
political, literary, and ecclesiastical spheres. Power in arms, push in
business, skill in politics, success in literature, and parade in religion are
the articles of the creed in which modem society believes.

III. The prosperous
wicked man is surrounded by meddling sycophants. Even admirers may be too
officious. If Haman had known and seen all, he might have prayed, “Save me from
my friends.” The king’s servants, in their selfish zeal, frustrated their own
purposes of aggrandisement. How often in trying to grasp too much we lose all.

IV. The prosperous
wicked man finds that false, greatness brings trouble. That greatness is false
which is not the outcome of goodness. The course of wicked prosperity cannot
run smooth. Haman meets with the checking and detecting Mordecai.

V. The prosperous
wicked man may learn that an unrestrained nature brings trouble. Haman was
intoxicated with his greatness. He was full of wrath. Wrath is cruel both to
the subject and the object.

VI. The prosperous
wicked man unwittingly plots his own downfall. Haman’s wrath led him to
dangerous extremes. Poor Haman! Already we see thee treading on a volcano. Thy
hands are digging the pit into which thou shalt fall. Thy minions are preparing
the gallows on which thou thyself shalt be hung. Learn--

1. Prosperity has its drawbacks.

2. “Better it is to be of a humble spirit with the lowly than to
divide the spoil with the proud.”

I. The insecurity
of earthly greatness. The king in this story was exposed to the plot of Bigthan
and Teresh. From it he was saved by the intervention of Mordecai, though by and
by to fall beneath the assassin’s blow. Great are the perils of the great.
Their lives often, behind all the splendour that takes the public eye, a sad
story.

II. The divine
foresight of and preparation for coming evil. The plotters, Bigthan and Teresh,
paid the penalty with their lives. But what had that plot to do with the great
story of this book--Israel’s deliverance from Haman? Much, for mark, the plot
was detected by Mordecai. The news was conveyed to Esther, and by her to the
king. Thus God’s design for Israel’s deliverance precedes Haman’s design for
Israel’s destruction Oh! the Divine preparations! How God goes before us! Does
Jacob look round upon famished Canaan? Lo! by the hand of long-lost Joseph, God
has prepared for him a house in Egypt. Do we come into peril? Before we reach
it God has been preparing for us a way of escape. His love is older than our
sin--than all sin.

III. The dignity of
conscientiousness in little things. Mordecai would not bow to Haman. Not from
disloyalty. He had stood by the king and saved him from the plotted death.
Because--this is the reason he gave--because he was a Jew: and Haman, he knew, was the Jews’ enemy.
Others bowed--he could not. A little thing, do you say, to bow to Haman? but s
little thing may have much effect onothers, as this had on Haman--on ourselves;
and, often repeated, is not little in its influence. He had conscience in this
matter, and to defile it had not been a little harm. Conscience can appear in
little things, but it deems nothing little that affects it, that expresses it.
The early Christians would rather die than cast a few idolatrous grains of
incense into the fire. Many an English martyr went to theprison and the stake
rather than bow down to the wafer-god of Romanism. In little things, as some
would deem them, we can take a stand for Christ.

IV. The wickedness
of revenge. Had Haman a just grudge against Mordecai? Let him have the matter
out with Mordecai alone? No; that will not suit him. He would punish a whole
nation. The proud became the revengeful. If a man is humble and has a lowly
estimate of himself, he will bear in silence the contempt and unkindness of
men. But pride is easily wounded--sees slights often where none were intended.
On a great platform we see, in the case of Haman, to what sin wounded pride
will hurry a man. And to what a doom! We need to beware. Are none of us ever
tempted harshly to judge a whole family because of the conduct of one of its
members? to say, in the spirit of Haman, he is bad--the whole lot is bad? “Hath
any wronged thee?” says Quarles, “be bravely revenged; slight it, and the work
is begun; forgive it, and the work is finished.”

V. The patience of
faith. The king’s life had been saved by Mordecai. But no honour had come to
him for the service--no reward. And now an edict is out against him and his
nation, dooming them all to death. And does he regret the stand that he has
taken? Does he loudly complain of the king’s ingratitude? He keeps silence. God
will think on him for good. Oh, troubled one I oh, darkened life! oh, soul tempest-tossed,
“only believe.” The clouds will pass--will melt into the eternal blue!(G.
T. Coster.)

Haman and Mordecai

1. It shows in a lurid but striking manner the diabolical character
of revenge. Pride is pride, and revenge is revenge in quality, although they
only show themselves in words with little stings in them, and by insinuations
that have no known ground of verity. If we do not make it our business to
chastise our spirits and purify them from the seeds and shadows of these vices,
in the forms in which they can assail us, can we be quite sure that if we were
on the wider stage, and had the ampler opportunity, we should not be as this
devilish Amalekite?

2. A lesson of personal independence. What meanness there is in this
country in bowing down to rank! in letting some lordly title stand in the place
of an argument! in seeking high patronage for good schemes, as men seek the
shadow of broad trees on hot days! in running after royal carriages! in
subservience to power, and adulation of wealth! Rise up, Mordecai, in thy
Jewish grandeur, and shame us into manliness, and help us to stand a little
more erect!

3. Finally, a lesson of patience and quietness to all the faithful.
Obey conscience, honour the right, and then fear no evil. Is the storm brewing?
It may break and carry much away, but it will not hurt you. A little reputation
is not you. A little property is not you. Health even is not you, nor is life
itself. The wildest storm that could blow would only cast you on the shores of
eternal peace and safety. But more probably the storm may melt all away in a
while and leave you in wonder at your own fears. (A. Raleigh, D. D.)

But why did Mordecai notobey the commandment of the king? It may
have been because he had a personal dislike to Haman, but that would not have
justified him in contradicting the will of the sovereign. Or itmay have been that,
being a Jew, he regarded himself as exempted from doing honour to one of a race
which God had cursed. “And the Lord said unto Moses, Write this for a memorial
in a book, and rehearse it in the ears of Joshua, for I will utterly put out
the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven.” But so long as Mordecai was a
captive in Persia he could hardly be excused, on this account, from resisting
the law of the land. The ground of this righteous Jew’s refusal must be sought
for deeper than either of these things. There can be little doubt, we think,
that the homage commanded to be paid to Haman amounted, in this Jew’s estimate,
to that which should be rendered to God only. The stand which he took had its
foundation in religion--a foundation which the men of the world have ever failed
to comprehend. (T. McEwan.)

Mordecai refuses to bow down to Haman

But on what ground did Mordecai refuse to bow to Haman and do him
reverence? The only answer which comes clearly out of the chapter to that
question is, that the position which he took was onethat was common to him with all his people,
so that it was sufficiently accounted for to others when he said, “I am a Jew.”
It was a matter of religion with him. But, that being admitted, the question
still arises, What was there in such a command as this of Xerxes to offend the
conscience of a pious Jew? Some have answered that, as the Persian monarch was
regarded as an incarnation of Ahura-Mazda, and therefore entitled to Divine
honours, the act of prostration before him was understood to imply worship; and
so homage paid to Haman as the king’s representative would be a virtual giving
of Divine honour to a human creature. This is confirmed even by heathen
writers--for Herodotus tells us that certain Greeks, on being pressed to
prostrate themselves before the king, when they were introduced into his
presence at Susa, declared “that it was not their custom to worship a man, nor
had they come for that purpose”; and Curtius has said, “The Persians, indeed,
not only from motives of piety, but also from prudence, worship their kings
among the gods.” Now, if that explanation be adopted, the act of Mordecai takes
its place beside the refusal of the early Christians to sacrifice to the Roman
emperor, and puts him on the honour rollamong those whose rule of life in all such
cases was, “We ought to obey God rather than men.” But while it would fully
justify Mordecai, this explanation is in itself not without difficulty. For did
not Joseph’s brethren make similar obeisance to him? Would not Mordecai after
his own elevation to Haman’s place be required to bow before the king? and must
we condemn Nehemiah for rendering to Artaxerxes the homage which Mordecai hererefused to Haman,
though Xerxes himself had commanded that it should be rendered? It is possible,
of course, that Mordecai was right, and that all the rest were wrong; but it is
not absolutely incontrovertible that the reverence here required was of the
nature of religious worship. Others, therefore, have sought forthe reason of
Mordecai’s disobedience to the royal mandate in the nationality of Haman.
Taking Agagite as equivalent to Amalekite, they remind us that the Amalekites
were the first to attack the Israelites after their escape from Egypt, and that
after his victory over them on that occasion Moses said, “The Lord hath sworn
that the Lord will have war with Amalek from generation to generation.” They
recall to our remembrance, also, the fact that it was for sparing some of the
Amalekites that Saul was first rejected by God from being king over Israel, and
that the only time that Samuel wielded a sword was when he “hewed Agag in
pieces before the Lord.” Now if Haman was indeed an Amalekite, it would be easy
to find in that a reason for Mordecai’s conduct as well as for Haman’s purpose
of revenge; for these descending feuds between races in the East are both
undying and enve nomed, especially when they are rooted in religious
differences. But then we have no other case in Scripture where a royal title
like Agag becomes a public patronymic, so as to be the name of a tribe; and it
is hard to account for the appearance of one of the hated race of Amalek here,
at this late date, in Susa. So there are difficulties connected with both
solutions, and it is not easy to choose between them. Perhaps the first, all things
considered, is the more satisfactory. (W. M. Taylor, D. D.)

Strong conviction

The commandment of the king was very express, and Mordecai
manifestly exposed himself to imminent danger by disregarding it. If, indeed,
his objection to pay homage to Haman was founded upon a conviction that such
homage amounted to something like idolatry, then we might regard his refusal as
ranking him with the three illustrious youths who braved the wrath of
Nebuchadnezzar rather than they would submit to worship the image which he had
set up. But we can scarcely take this view of the matter, as it is not likely
that Mordecai would have withheld from the king himself the outward reverence
which the law and usage of the country required. But if it was because Haman
was of the seed of Amalek, that the Jew would not bow to him nor do him
reverence, then intense must have been the detestation of that race, when he
would rather run the risk of incurring the displeasure of the king than pay
respect to one of them who stood so high in the royal favour. Yet we conceive
that he might feel himself fully vindicated in his own conscience for acting as
he did. It was, after all, a high religious scruple by which he was influenced.
By the law of Moses the Amalekites were condemned to perpetual infamy. No
earthly rank or station could blot out or modify that sentence. In this view of
the subject, Mordecai would have supposed himself an apostate from his religion
had he done reverence to Haman, and therefore he refused to do it, whatever might
be the consequence to himself. We cannot but respect such a feeling as this,
generated as it was by regard for the Divine law. It could not be appreciated
by the other servants of the king, who may have attributed Mordecai’s conduct
to a sullen and haughty temper; but, although the matter in itself was
apparently unimportant, it was an evidence of real heroism of character in this
man to obey the dictate of conscience at the hazard of personal suffering. True
religion does not interfere with the discharge of the ordinary courtesies of
life, nor does it forbid our rendering that honour to rank and station which is
their due.But
when vice and real infamy are shrouded under high rank, the Christian must
beware of acting so as to make it supposed that the rank forms an apology for
the vice and infamy, or renders them less hateful than they really are. (A.
B. Davidson, D.
D.)

A little matter

Allwas going well with this man. His rivals had been
crushed, his seat had been set above the seats of all the noblemen at court,
the king had made him his boon companion, and had issued orders that the palace
servants should bow before him and do him reverence. He was as nearly happy as
a man can be whose ruling passion is vanity; but such men hold their happiness
by a very frail tenure. It does not look altogether well that Ahasuerus should
have needed to give special orders about his servants bowing to Haman. Darius
had not needed to do this in the case of Daniel. Had the favourite been
respected and liked, men would have given him all seemly honour unbidden. “But
Mordecai bowed not, nor did him reverence.” It does seem a very small matter;
but when such a man as Mordecai attached importance to it we must pause and
consider whether the matter was really so small as it seemed. For it is an
unsafe way of reasoning to say about anything, “It is only one little act; why
scruple over it? If it does no good it can do no harm”; and so forth. By such
reasoning habits of untruth and intemperance have many a time been formed, and
what was perhaps little in itself, if it had been possible to separate it from
all else, has been found to be anything but little in its results. The truth
is, we cannot separate any single action from the rest of our lives; so that
the importance of an action depends not on its greatness or its littleness, but
on many other circumstances, such as how often we do it; the effect it has on
others, particularly its influence on our own consciences. In this case it so
happened that what Mordecai did--rather what he determined not to do--proved to
be of very great importance to the whole Jewish people and the whole Persian
empire; but he could not know that. What he did know was that, if he had once
bowed to Haman, his conscience would have been defiled, as surely as Daniel’s
would have been if he had eaten the king’s meat; and polluted conscience is no
trifle. A man has to carry it about with him all day, to go to sleep with it if
he can, to encounter it again when he awakes, until Godpurges out the stain. But why should
Mordecai have feared that, by bowing toHaman as the rest did, he would bring on
himself this worst evil, a bad conscience? “We do not need to suppose that the
homage enjoined was idolatrous; it may have been nearly so; but Mordecai knew
the character of the prime minister, and he knew the fifteenth Psalm: in his eyes “a vile
person is contemned; but he honoureth them that fear the Lord.” In addition to
the knowledge Mordecai could not but have of Haman’s character, he knew him to
be of the seed-royal of Amalek; and a man with the spirit of Moses and Samuel
in him would not recognise the advancement of “the Jews’ enemy.” The point
might be small in itself, but the principle involved in it was to Mordecai more
important than life. The day was not far off when Ahasuerus and all Persia
agreed with Mordecai in his estimate of Haman. But persons who act on high
principle must be content to find that few on earth understand them at the
time. Angels understand and smile on them, but the smiles of angels are not
seen. Possibly some of Mordecai’s Jewish brethren might hint to him that his
conduct was rather extreme (that terrible word!)--savouring more of bigotry
than of pious charity. (A. M. Symington, B. A.)

The difference between right and wrong shown in little things

The difference between right and wrong may be shown in a little
matter, but it is not therefore a little difference; and they who are
determined to be thorough in their allegiance to God will make no distinction
in their conduct between small things and great. Very noble, too, was
Mordecai’s firmness in resisting the entreaties of his fellow-servants, for he
shut up the whole controversy with the simple confession, “I am a Jew.” He will
not needlessly publish his religion on the house-top, but neither will he be
ashamed of it in the “king’s gate.” It might cost him much to make the
confession, but he knew that sin would be still more costly, and so he did not
shrink from saying, “I am a Jew.” (W. M. Taylor, D. D.)

Limits to the claims of official civility-

InMordecai’s adherence to his religious principles we see
that there are limits to the claims of social and official civility--bounds
that duty does not allow us to pass in our respect for our superiors. The Word
of God is the standard of respectability and manners as well as of faith, and
it forbids all lying and deceit, all flattery and all mean compliances with the
wishes of others, however exalted. It does not allow us to do anything that is
contrary to good breeding and the chivalry of right. It does not allow us to
neglect our duties, waste our time or injure our health, merely to please a
friend or a potentate. Let it be remembered, to the honour of one of the
Presidents of the United States, General Jackson, that he never allowed any
visitors to keep him from the house of God on the Lord’s day. (W. A. Scott,
D. D.)

Then the king’s servants,
which were in the king’s gate, said unto Mordecai, Why transgressest thou the
king’s commandment?--

Mordecai’s companions

Butyonder come his fellow-servants of the palace; what
have they to say? Why they Jay to him, “Why transgressest thou the king’s
commandment?” And verily, aged man, why? Is it that all eyes may be turned upon
you? It is true, indeed, that he is the observed of all observers who does not
go with the multitude, even though they go to do evil. Any one that dares to
think and speak for himself is sure to be condemned by the many that he differs
from; for his position and principles are a running commentary of condemnation
upon them. It has ever been so, and perhaps it will always continue to be so,
for it is not for the man that lives in the cellar to say what he sees who
dwells on the house-top. Some men are before their times, and some men never
catch up with the age in which they live; and some men have not moral courage
enough to hear themselves breathe honestly and freely. We see this daily as to
the press and the pulpit. Is not the daily bread of the printer put in jeopardy
if his journal does not meet the popular taste? And have we not seen large
bodies of business men combine to starve newspapers to death by withholding
their patronage unless the said papers would defend their conduct? And is it
not true that if one pulpit has the courage to utter an honest opinion, that
does not happen to coincide with the rest of the pulpits, that then all the
pulpits and papers that have neither capacity to understand nor the moral
honesty to comprehend the poor dissenter open their batteries upon him? (W.
A. Scott, D. D.)

Principle seems impolitic

Andagain his fellow-servants say, “Friend Mordecai,
consider well what you are going to do. Remember, it is not Haman merely, but
his master also, that you offend. Is it wise, then, for you to peril the
forfeiture of your place and your life upon a question of mere etiquette or
courtesy? It is extremely impolitic and dangerous for you not to do homage to
so great a prince. And besides, if you will not bow with us, then you will have
to suffer alone.” “Yes, friends,” says he, “I have considered all this; and I
am content to meet the consequences. It is not a mere question of courtesy. I
am a Jew. My religion is with me a glorious reality.” (W. A. Scott, D. D.)

Cowardice cannot understand courage

Mordecai’sfellow-servants were not capable of
understanding his principles. Cowards never apprehend the true character of a
brave man. Little minds cannot see up into the magnanimity of a great and noble
soul. (W. A. Scott, D. D.)

For he told them that he
was a Jew.

Fidelity to principle

We have in the case of Mordecai an example of fidelity to
principle which is worthy of all study and imitation. He felt that it was wrong
to do homage to Haman. In resisting the entreaties of his fellow-servants, he
shut up the whole controversy with the simple confession, “I am a Jew.” Herein
he gave an example which Christians might follow with advantage. Have the
courage, young men, when you are asked to do what you know to be wrong, to
reply simply, “I am a Christian.” Add to your faith courage--the heroism not of
the warrior but of the man who has learned to run the gauntlet of ridicule and
scorn, and to follow the dictates of duty “uncaring consequences.” To quote the
words of the greatest wit of his age,--“Learn to inure your principles against
ridicule. You can no more exercise your reason if you live in the constant
dread of laughter than you can enjoy your life if you are in the constant
terror of death. H you think it right to differ from the times, and to make a
point of morals, do it, however rustic, however antiquated, however pedantic it
may appear; do it as a man who wore a soul of his own and did not wait till it
was breathed into him by the breath of fashion.” (W. M. Taylor, D. D.)

And when Haman saw that Mordecai bowed not . . . then was Haman
full of wrath.

Vanity and cruelty

Haman manifests by his behaviour the intimate connection there is
between vanity and cruelty.

1. Vanity is a form of magnified egotism. When a vain man looks out
on the world it is always through the medium of his own vastly magnified
shadow. Like the Brocken Ghost, this shadow becomes a haunting presence
standing out before him in huge proportions. He has no other standard of
measurement. The good is what gives him pleasure; evil is what is noxious to
him.

2. Vanity leads to cruelty through the entire dependence of the vain
person on the good opinion of others. In this vanity differs from pride. A
proud man is satisfied with himself, but the vain man is always looking outside
himself with feverish eagerness to secure all the honours that the world can
bestow upon him. While a proud man in an exalted position scarcely deigns to
notice the “dim, common people,” the vain man betrays his vulgarity by caring supremely
for popular adulation. Therefore, while the haughty person can afford to pass
over a slight with contempt, the vain creature who lives on the breath of
applause is mortally offended by it and roused to avenge the insult with
corresponding rage. (W. F. Adeney, M. A.)

The misery of pride

A man of principle would have respected the conscientiousness of
the act, even though he might have laughed at what he regarded the smallness of
the scruple. A man of ordinary common sense would have treated the whole affair
with indifference; but Haman valued his office just because it carried with it
the right to such homage, and therefore what would have been a mole-hill, or
hardly so much, to others, was a mountain to him. The proud man thus increases
his own misery; and little slights, which other people would not so much as
notice, are felt by him with great keenness. He whose arm has been recently
vaccinated is very sensitive where the pustule is, so that a push which you
would think nothing of is agony to him. Now, in precisely the same way the
proud man is “touchy,” as we say; the slightest infringement on his dignity
wounds him to the quick, and when other people are laughing he is vowing
revenge; for, as this story illustrates, the passions areall near of kin, and one prepares the way
for another. Brooding over the refusal of Mordecai to do him reverence, it
became so magnified in his estimation that he determined to punish it; there
was revenge. That he might gratify that revenge, it became necessary to bring
the peculiarities of the Jewish nation before the king, and he requested their
destruction on the ground that they were not profitable to the monarch, whereas
the sole reason why he suggested their extirpa tion was that Mordecai had
slighted him; there was falsehood. Then, in planning their massacre, there was
murder. Here, therefore, were four sins all in a line, each rising above the
other in enormity--pride, revenge, falsehood, murder. People think, sometimes,
that pride is no great sin; some almost speak of it as if itwere half a virtue;
but, as this and other histories make plain, it is the germ of other evils that
are worse than itself, and therefore we ought to be on our guard against
allowing ourselves to become its victims. And how shall we best counteract it?
I reply, by cultivating a sense of responsibility. That which we have, whether
it be ability, or wealth, or exalted position, we have received as a trust, and
we are to use it, as stewards for God, in the service of our fellow-men. Let us
keep pressing the questions, Who hath made me to differ from others? What have
I that I have not received? For what purpose have I been entrusted with these
things? And the more we ponder these, the less we shall be inclined to plume
ourselves on our possessions, and the more we shall be stirred up to the
service of our generation by the will of God. (W. M. Taylor, D. D.)

Injured vanity

“A man will forgive you anything,” Professor Huxley said, “if you
do not injure his vanity. Once do that, and he will never forgive you.”

Evil passion its own penalty

Now, it may be thought by some that the case of Haman allowing
himself to be so chafed and perturbed by a trifle as to be made miserable in
the midst of so many advantages, is to be regarded as altogether extreme and
without parallel; but we believe that on examination it will be found that the
wicked always receive part of their punishment in the violence of some
unhallowed passion which blinds them to all the real benefits of their lot. Is
there not a gnaw ing disease in the heart of the covetous man, for example,
which prevents him from enjoying the good things which are placed within his
reach, just because he has not yet acquired all that he wishes to possess? And
still, as he gets more and more, is he not as far as ever from being satisfied,
since he has not yet reached the point at which he aims? Or again, look to the
man who is the slave of envy, and mark how miserable this base passion makes
him. He has ample means of enjoyment, which he can call his own; but his
neighbour has something which pleases him better, and just because that one
thing is awanting to himself, he can find no satis faction in the varied
blessings which a kind providence has showered upon him. His neighbour’s good
is to him what Mordecai at the king’s gate was to Haman. In like manner, I
might advert to the working of the more violent passions of anger and revenge
as a cause of intense torment to those who cherish them, and as altogether
preventing them from taking advantage of many sources of happiness which lie
open to them on every side. I might also allude to the misery which wounded
vanity and affronted pride often bring to those who have high notions of their
own importance, as when a trifling word or action will discompose them for many
days together, and deprive them of their relish for the things that formerly
pleased them, and made them happy. But enough has been said to show how by a
just retribution the ungodly, following their natural tendencies and passions,
work out their own passion. How different is the picture presented to us, where
grace reigns in the heart. Although corruption is not altogether eradicated
from the spiritual man, yet its power is subdued; the fierce passions are
tamed, love takes the place of envy, malignity, and wrath; and the believer,
seeking and finding his chief enjoyment in God, remains comparatively unruffled
by those incidents which breed so much vexation and disquietude in the breast
of the ungodly. (A. B. Davidson, D. D.)

Wounded pride

Woundedpride excites revenge, and this always burns
hottest in the weakest minds. How insatiable is revenge, especially when it is
associated with national and religious rancour! Haman learned that Mordecai was
a Jew, a name that called up the bitterest recollections in the breast of an
Amalekite, and he resolves at once on the total extermination of that people. (T.
McCrie, D. D.)

A favourite lust

Andit has always been one of the devices of the enemy to
drive men into criminal excesses to their own ruin, through the instrumentality
of some favourite lust or appetite. It was the covetous spirit of Judas that
opened a way to the tempter to hurry him on to betray the Saviour. (A. B.
Davidson, D. D.)

Then was Haman full of
wrath.

The penalty of an evil passion

How dreadfully this wrath flamed in his bosom we learn from the
method which he took to express it. We may observe, at present, what misery
pride, by its own nature and inseparable consequences, brings upon men. No
proud man ever received all that respect, or was treated with all that delicacy
of regard, which he thought his due. Now pride mortified by neglect or
contempt, kindles a fire in the soul which burns, and torments, and destroys. (G.
Lawson.)

Wherefore Haman thought to destroy all the Jews that were
throughout the whole kingdom.

Plotting in vain

We proceed to consider the scheme of destruction which Haman
arranged with the utmost craft. It seemed in its arrangement perfectly secure.
Its accomplishment appeared certain and beyond resistance.

1. Haman’s malice was extreme, equal to any result to which it might
lead. There was no reluctance, no holding back in the carrying out his purposes
of wickedness to the utmost.

2. Haman’s plan was extremely crafty and determined. It involved many
successive steps, and he faithfully persevered through them all. But what
avails all this plotting against God? How mad and silly seem all the
well-arranged plans of this scheme of wickedness when the providence and power
of God are brought into the account! The secrecy of the plan is nothing. He
that is higher than the highest regardeth it. An infinite power unseen is
contending against him. Remember the story of Elisha, and his servant on the
hill of Samaria (2 Kings 6:15).

3. We see the people whom Haman desired to destroy given entirely
into his hands. The king makes him an unlimited grant. “The king said unto
Haman, The silver is given to thee, the people also, to do with them as it
seemeth good to thee.” “Mordecai rent his clothes, and put on sackcloth with
ashes, and went out into the midst of the city, and cried with a loud and
bitter cry,” etc. Alas, what extended sorrow among men the arbitrary wickedness
of man is able to produce! Ambition deluges the earth with blood. The wicked
covetousness of a few may doom myriads to misery, with no relief. The pride of
this world will not stop to hear; the business of this world will not stop to
consider; the prosperity and self-indulgence of this world will not be troubled
with the griefs of the absent suffering; the indifference of this world cannot
take the trouble to read, or think, or act, concerning them.

4. We see on the side of the Jews no power to resist. The highest
human power was irrevocably pledged to their oppressor. Every advantage is on
the side of the oppressor. But God has His own plans already laid and fixed.

5. We are ready to ask, in reference to the case before us, How could
any one ever present greater difficulties? But God delights in overcoming
difficulties, and in causing the faith of His people to endure in the midst of
all discouragements. He allows the obstacles in their path to accumulate to the
utmost. And God graciously honoured the faith which He imparted by fulfilling
all its expectations in a manner the most complete. If you come to serve the
Lord, youmust
endure your part of the trials which His people meet. (S. H. Tyng, D. D.)

Revenge

Justice is said to blindfold herself that she may hold the scales
evenly, not knowing what has been put into each; but revenge shuts both eyes
that it may see no scales at all. What monstrous disproportion between the
offence and the penalty, to avenge a small personal affront received from one
Jew by “causing to perish in one day all Jews, old and young”! To say nothing
of Nero orDomitian,
nor of Radama in Madagascar--for these, being heathen, had to that extent the
same excuse as Haman--let me recall in a few words a well-known story. There
were many Protestants in France after the Reformation, some of them nobles, all
of them peaceful citizens. Their numbers and their growth vexed the Pope, and
especially vexed the Pope’s “niece,” Catherine de Medici, queen of France, and
mother of three of its kings. Suddenly, while one of her sons, Charles IX., was
young, Catherine made peace with the Huguenots, and displayed great zeal in
enforcing new laws in favour of her Protestant subjects. After two years,
without any warning, on the eve of St. Bartholomew’s Day, there began a
massacre in which six thousand persons perished in Paris alone, and fifty
thousand in the provinces of France, within three days. When the joyful tidings
reached Rome, public thanks were given in the churches. Haman would have
rejoiced in the bloodshed; but he must have owned himself outdone in cunning
and blasphemy. Catherine succeeded where Haman failed; her victims were
effectually blindfolded, and she took the name of a holy God and a merciful Saviour
to justify an act which even those of her own creed now blush to acknowledge. (A.
M. Symington, B. A.)

Enmity to God’s people

We see how enmity to God’s truth and His people displays itself
with restless activity for the accomplishment of its ends. (A. B. Davidson,
D. D.)

The drawing of the lot took place in the month Nisan, or about March
of our year, and the day fixed by it was the thirteenth day of Adar, or
February--a period of nearly twelve months intervening. The patience of Haman
would be sadly tried by this result, but his superstitious fears would prevent
him from acting contrary to the decision of “Pur.” In tracing the deep lines of
providence in the whole narrative, however, we cannot help seeing a higher and
more beneficent wisdom than that of chance. Had an earlier day been decided
upon, sufficient time might not have been given to Mordecai to use the means
which he did to frustrate the conspiracy. If the suspense of the Jews was a
trial of their faith, and an incentive to prayer, the interval was also a boon
in so far as it gave Mordecai leisure for deliberate action in view of the
king’s subsequent decree. No doubt, in this instance, the disposing of the lot
was of the Lord--a disposing of it very different from the intention of those
who used it. So may the lot become in the hands of those who believe in its
decisions the means for the accomplishment of the retributive purposes of God.
(T. McEwan.)

The blind method of revenge

Revenge, when it becomes a master passion, is the worst madness.

I. Revenge is
blind in its method. This is illustrated in the conduct of Haman. He caused the
lot to be cast to find out the favourable day for the accomplishment of his
purpose.

1. He was blind to the fact that there is no chance.

2. He was blind to the fact that so-called chance might as easily be
against him asfor
him.

3. He was blind to the fact that “the lot is cast into the lap; but
the whole disposing thereof is of the Lord.”

II. Haman persisted
in his revengeful purpose. What a glorious revolution would soon take place, if
the good were as persistent in the pursuit of merciful purposes as the bad are
in revengeful projects. Every bad passion is injurious in its permanence.

III. Revenge is
destructive in its patience. Haman was willing to wait twelve months in order
that his revenge might be the more signally marked. But his very patience
worked his ruin. Time is not on the side of revengeful waiters. (W. Burrows,
B. A.)

Ifweblame Ahasuerus for too readily listening to
the invective of Haman, and condemning the Jews untried and unheard, we should
be on our guard against committing the same sin, by giving heed to scandal in
regard to others, without careful personal inquiry and observation, lest we
should be only crediting the creations of the worst passions and distempers of
our fallen nature. (T. McEwan.)

Half the truth dangerous

There is no notice taken of Mordecai. Not a syllable about his own
injured pride. No reference made to the enmity of the Amalekites to the Jews.
The real merits of the proposal are all kept back, and only those things are
mentioned which were fitted to arouse the indignation of the king against the
Jewish people. They were “a certain people”--a nondescript race, scattered
abroad, like so many rebels against the government, and yet preserving their
own unity; having their own laws, and despising constituted authority;
contemning the king’s laws, and setting the example of insubordination; and
sowing dissension and strife throughout all the provinces of the empire. For
these reasons it was clearly not expedient that they should be tolerated any
longer. How skilfully does the crafty conspirator conceal his malice and
revenge under cover of the king’s profit. He didnot ask for the destruction of this
disaffected people as a favour to himself, but in making the proposal he
artfully insinuated that he was doing the king a service. (T. McEwan.)

There is a certain people
scattered abroad.

The destruction of the Jews

He stood high in the favour of his prince, but did he not risk the
total loss of that favour by a proposal so evidently unjust and inhumane? Why
did he not dread the wrath of the king, which is as messengers of death? Might
he not have heard such words as these in answer to his proposal: “Audacious wretch!
what hast thou seen in me that thou shouldst hope to make me the murderer of my
people? Man of blood! thou scruplest not to seek the destruction, at one blow,
of thousands of my subjects, upon a vague, unsupported charge which thou
bringest against them! Wilt thou not another day follow the example of Bigthan
and Teresh? Wilt thou be more afraid to lay thy hand upon one man, though a
king, than upon many thousands of my subjects who have done thee no wrong?” (G.
Lawson.)

Haman’s proposition

contained truth enough to make it plausible, and error enough to
make it cruel, and enough personally agreeable to the king to make it popular
with him. (W. A. Scott, D. D.)

Cunning malice

But observe the cunning malice of his address to the king. He does
not say, “There is an old Jew that has offended me, and, through me, offered an
affront to your sacred majesty; therefore let me execute vengeance upon him.”
No, not a word of this sort. He feared to show his real character for rancour
to the king, or courtiers. He professes to have no personal motives, but to be
moved altogether by a desire for the public good. (W. A. Scott, D. D.)

True and false accusations

Having formed so thorough-going a purpose, Haman took steps to
execute it. We need not wonder at his lying about the character of the Jews;
for it is often possible to use nothing but the language of truth, and yet to
utter only the greater falsehood. It was quite true of God’s people, that their
laws were “diverse from all people”: it istrue of them to-day, and was equally true
then, that, being bought with a price, they cannot be slaves of men; that, if
any human law interferes with the will of their Saviour, they can give only the
one answer, “We ought to obey God rather than men.” But it was false to say,
“Neither keep they the king’s laws”; for, in respect of everything that man has
a right to command, God’s people are the best subjects. To the fathers of these
exiles the God of Israel had given this commandment: “Seek the peace of the city whither I have
caused you to be carried away captives, and pray unto the Lord for it: for in the peace
thereof shall ye have peace”; and Haman could scarcely be ignorant that both
the former empire and this one had profited by the private virtue and public
faithfulness of pious Jews. God will answer Haman in His own way. But we ought
to be fully prepared for the calumny, seeing it arises from two causes which
remain always in force. The world cannot understand what it is that we owe to the
love of God and to the blood of Christ, and how He must, therefore, reign
supreme in the believing heart; and the world extremely dislikes to hear a
claim advanced for liberty of conscience which reminds it of a power higher
than its own. (A. M. Symington, B. A.)

Therefore it is not for
the king’s profit to suffer them.--

Profit

Worldly hearts are not led by good or evil, but by profit and
loss; neither have they grace to know that nothing is profitable but what is
honest; they must needs offend by rule, that measure all things by profit and
measure profit by their imagination. How easy it is to suggest strange untruths
when there is nobody to make answer! False Haman, how is it not for the king’s
profit to suffer the Jews? If thou construe this profit for honour, the king’s
honour is in the multitude of his subjects; and what people more numerous than
they? If for gain, the king’s profit is in thelargeness of his tributes; and what people
are more deep in their payments? If for service, what people are more
officious? No name under heaven hath made so many fools, so many villains, as
this of profit. (Bp. Hall.)

No true profit in sin

Itis, then, a question of profit or loss, not of right and
justice. Never was there a scheme of villainy that was not gilded over with theplausible pretence of
public utility. Nothing under heaven has made so many fools and so many
heartless villains as supposed profit. The greatest good to the greatest number
is indeed desirable, but such an object was never yet reached by a disregard of
justice and right. Expediency is a fallacy. It is never allowed us to try the
experiment of doing evil that good may come. How did it turn out in the case
before us? The king is to get ten thousand talents for this execution. But
instead of that his only profit was the blood and mangled bodies of thousands
of his faithful subjects. Ah, cruel Haman! Are these the tender mercies of the
wicked? Are these the profits of sin? What “if thou couldst have swum in a
whole sea of Jewish blood, if thou couldst have raised mountains of their
carcasses? What if thou couldst have made all Persia thy shambles, who would
have given thee one farthing for all those piles of flesh, for all those
streams of blood?”--Hall. (W. A. Scott, D. D.)

Haman’s murderous proposal

I. The commonness
of it. In every age God’s people have been hated for the very reasons that are
here assigned. They worship the one true and living God. David tells of
confederacies formed to “cut off the Jews from being a nation.” The ten
persecutions in the early ages of Christianity. At the present day private
animosity is indulged as far as the laws of the land will allow. “All that will
live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.”

II. The impiety of
it.

III. The folly of
it. Haman with all his power could not prevail against the Jews, who yet in
appearance were altogether in his hands. (C. Simeon.)

Crassus owned a landed estate valued at more than one million and
a half pounds sterling, and Ridorus, after having lost a good deal in the civil
war, left an estate worth one million forty-seven hundred pounds. And Lentulus,
the augur, died worth three millions, three hundred and thirty-three thousand,
three hundred and thirty-three pounds sterling. Apicius was possessed of above
nine hundred and sixteen thousand, six hundred and seventy-one pounds. His
wealth, however, was by no means satisfactory or sufficient for him. For after
having spent vast sums in his kitchen, he was so miserable that he put an end
to his own life by poison. These rich old Romans were not bankers or mere
merchants and traders. These amounts did not merely pass through their hands in
the way of trade. They were worth so much in hard money. Nor were all the
millionaires of ancient times Romans. Herodotus says that Xerxes, in going to
Greece, the father of Ahasuerus--or as some say, Ahasuerus himself--found
Pythius, the Lydian, possessed of two thousand talents of silver and four
millions of gold darics; that is, about twenty-seven and a half millions of
dollars (Lib. 7.). And Plutarch informs us, that after Crassus, the Roman
general, had given the tenth of all he had to Hercules, he entertained ten
thousand people at his tables, and gave to every citizen as much corn as would
support him three months; and then had seven thousand one hundred Roman talents
remaining; that is, about twenty-eight millions of dollars. Surely, then, there
is nothing incredible in our history because it speaks of ten thousand talents
of silver. The wealth and luxury of the old world, in many particulars,
surpassed our own times. The enormous debts contracted in the days of Alexander
and of the Caesars prove that the wealth of those times was great, although
this is a way to prove one’s wealth by that is not at all to my mind,
especially for a Church. Anthony owed, we are told, at the ides of March,
£333,333 13s. 4d., which, however, it is said he paid before the calends of
April, every penny of it. (W. A. Scott, D. D.)

Costly revenge

His revenge was so dear to him, that he would not only hazard the
king’s favour by the horrid proposal of murdering a whole nation, but expose
himself to a severe loss in his fortune, rather than suffer the hated race to
live. What liberal sacrifices will men make to their passions! They will give a
great part of the substance of their house to the gratification of their hatred
or their lust. Why then should we think it a hard matter to give a part of our
substance to God? If our desires are as eager for the advancement of virtue and
purity, if we are as earnest in our wishes to have the wants of the poor
supplied, and the afflictions of the unfortunate relieved, as revengeful men,
like Haman, are to gratify their ill-nature, it will give us pleasure to honour
theLord with our
substance, and to minister to the needs of our fellow-men. (G. Lawson.)

Ahasuerus appears to have been a man of an easy temper, and ready
to confer the greatest obligations, without deliberation, on those whom he loved.
But there is notrue
wisdom without judgment and steadiness. A thoughtless man, of an easy temper,
is more likely to turn out a vicious than a virtuous character, because in a
world where so many more bad than good men are to be met with, he is likely to
give up himself to the guidance of those who will lead him out of the way of
understanding; or if he should be led in the right path by some of his friends,
there are others that will lead him out of it. Ahasuerus would have heaped
favours upon the Jews, if Mordecai had been to him at this time what Haman was.

I. Many have not
duly distinguished between an easy and a good temper. An easy temper is a very
dangerous one, when it is not under the powerful restraints of wisdom. It is
vain to boast of a ready compliance with every good motion suggested to us if
we are equally ready to comply with bad motions. If we surrender our selves to
the direction of our friends, we may soon find that we have given up ourselves
to our enemies. He is not our friend who desires to be oar lord.

II. Please men for
their good to edification. Be always ready to grant reasonable requests, and to
follow good counsels. But you must judge for your selves, by the light which
God has given you, what requests are lawful to be granted, and what counsels
are worthy to be followed. (G. Lawson.)

The terrors of despotism

I. This history is
an illustration of the danger of a one-man power--of an absolute despotism. The
liberty that rests on the selfishness, or the inclination of one man, or of a
hundred men, is suspended despotism, and if we must choose between the rule of
one man, or of thirty, without a written constitution and laws, we should
greatly prefer the one. In either case, our property and personal liberty are
at the will of human caprice or passion.

II. We see how
greatly we are blest, in having a government, not of men, but of just, mild,
enlightened and equitable written and published laws, guaranteeing to us
liberty in the worship of God, and in the pursuits of life and the enjoyment of
our institutions. The King of Persia, in some instances, seems to have been
surrounded by the restraints of precedents, yet, in other cases, he could do
what he pleased with the lives and property of his subjects. There was no
written constitution.

III. We are never to
despair of the ark, even when it fall into the hands of the philistines. God
will never forsake His people. It is no new thing for the godly to have to
suffer persecution. The Jews were misrepresented. Even what Haman said of them
that was true was so said as togive a fresh colouring to the whole picture. There is no proof
that the Jews were factious under the Persian rule. On the contrary, from the
lives of Daniel, Ezra, and Nehemiah we should infer just the opposite. It is an
old aspersion of God’s people, to charge them with singularity. Would to God
there was more cause for the imputation than there is t The very thing,
therefore, that constituted their glory was made their offence. But it is
better always to fall into the hands of God than of men. This was David’s
choice, and observation approves of it. The very reasons Haman gave for
destroying the Hebrews are among the very reasons why God will not let them
perish out of the earth. That which whets the sword of men moves the pity of
the Almighty. God sometimes leaves His people to come into the greatest peril,
that His power may be the more easily seen in their deliverance. Pharaoh was
raised up to show His power, and so was Haman. “God taketh the wise in their
own craftiness, and ensnares the wicked in the works of their own hands.” In
the darkest hour it is our duty and our highest happiness still to trust in
God. (W. A. Scott, D. D.)

II. Here are
inconsistent precursory measures. Wickedness renders a man inconsistent.
Revenge impelled to action, but conscience still spoke in reproving tones. All
must be done according to law. Obedience to the eternal law of right is the
only method by which human lives can be rendered consistent and harmonious.

III. Here is a low
estimate of human life, shown--

1. In the unmethodical nature of the slaughter designed.

2. In the indiscriminate nature of the slaughter designed.

3. In the rapacity after property. Life versus property. This decree
is one of the unwritten decrees of modern civilisation.

IV. Here is
wickedness bolstered up by human authority. Learn--

1. Great men should try to get a true idea of the importance of human
life.

2. Statesmen should remember that the true wealth of a community is
its men.

3. All ought to remember that life is ignoble when passion is allowed
to rule. (W. Burrows, B. A.)

Persian postal facilities

The postal service for that age was exceedingly good, but only the
king could take advantage of it. Indeed, it was one of the means used by him
for the government of the empire, and was very largely, according to Herodotus,
the device of this same Xerxes. Along the chief lines of travel he established,
at intervals of fourteen miles, post-houses, at each of which relays of horses
and couriers were always in readiness. One of these messengers, receiving an
official document, rode with it at his utmost speed to the next post-house,
where it was taken onward by another courier with another horse, and in this
way a proclamation like that here described would reach the farthest limits of
the empire in five or six weeks. (W. M. Taylor, D. D.)

Thewickedness of the intended massacre does not rest with
Ahasuerus and Haman. Great multitudes of the king’s subjects must participate
in the guilt. The governors and rulers of every province, and the people under
their command, have letters written to them, sealed with the king’s seal, to
contribute their part to the massacre. Let the great consider what they do. If
they are wicked, they are not wicked alone. We ought to bless God that no man
hath power to require us to do anything but according to the known laws of the
land. And yet men of true virtue will not comply with the will of the most
absolute monarchs when it is not consistent with the laws of justice and of
mercy. At the famous Bartholomew massacre, when the King of France sent his
orders to the commanders in the different provinces to massacre the Huguenots,
one of them returned him this answer: “In my district your Majesty has many brave
soldiers, but no butchers.” That virtuous governor never felt any effects of
the royal resentment. It is to be feared that few of the Persian governors
would have given such proofs of virtuous courage if the king’s edict had not
been reversed. (G. Lawson.)

And the king and Haman sat down to drink; but the city Shushan was
perplexed.

Society broken into sections

Alas! how society is broken up into sections--one part caring
little for another that is closest to it, and at the very moment pressing upon
it for sympathy and succour. Stone walls were all that separated these two men
from an agonising population, and yet they were as insensible to the sufferings
which were without as though they had been hundreds of miles removed from that
scene of perplexity and dismay. How many are in suffering in every great city!
How many tears are being shed, groans of distress uttered, pangs of anguish,
and remorse endured! But the world takes no notice of them--enjoys its ease,
and dulls all sensibility to the pain of others by sensual delights. “What is
that to us? see thou to that,” is still the reply of the world to those who
have been its slaves. Happy shall be the time when the gospel shall have
rectified this state of things; when each shall regard himself, like the
Saviour, as a minister to others; when the wide breaches of fashion and caste
shall be bridged over and healed; when priest and Levite shall disappear in the
compassionate Samaritan; when every man shall look not upon his own things, but
also on the things of others, and when society, from the highest to the lowest,
shall be a holy, sympathising, loving brotherhood, possessed of the spirit and
imitating the example of our Lord Jesus Christ! It was not the Jews only who
were distressed and alarmed, but the whole community--some, because in the
destruction of the Jews they would themselves suffer in friendship or outward
estate--others from feelings of humanity at the prospective slaughter of good
citizens and unoffending women and children--some through fear that a deed so
cruel and horrible might lead to an insurrection in the provinces, and an
indiscriminate plundering and murdering among the inhabitants--and others lest
such an unrighteous decree might provoke the judgment of the Almighty. The city
was panic-stricken. If the king was to act thus arbitrarily and unreasonably in
one instance, might he not do so in many ways?(T. McEwan.)

Self-indulgence

How self-indulgence renders men callous to the distresses and
sufferings of their fellow-men. (A. B. Davidson, D. D.)

The irregularities of human conditions

I. The
inequalities of human conditions.

1. The most striking instance of inequality is that which is
illustrated between the condition of the oppressor and the oppressed.

2. This is further illustrated by the contrast between the jollity of
the palace and the perplexity of the city.

3. The indifference of one class of the community towards another and
seemingly less favoured class is brought to view in this passage.

4. This indifference has its root in and is the outcome of
selfishness.

II. The mysteries
of human conditions. Haman feasting with the king, Mordecai mourning at the
king’s gate.

III. The
compensating forces of human conditions. The pleasure of Ahasuerus was not a
permanent stream. The glory of Haman was soon tarnished. The sorrow of Mordecai
was turned into laughter.

IV. The sympathetic
element in human conditions. Sorrow draws men and women more closely together
than joy. When one part of a city suffers, the whole of the city should be
perplexed.

V. The harmonising
principle for human conditions. What principle is there that is to adjust in
fit proportions the various parts and members of human society? The gospel
rightly understood, broadly interpreted, and fully received. The gospel
dethrones selfishness, and teaches the true brotherhood of humanity.

VI. The true
sustaining power for all human conditions: “Even our faith.” The true help in life’s
difficulties is to go into the sanctuary of God. By faith and prayer the
world’s true heroes have ever conquered. Here learn--

1. To keep away from sensuality, which hardens the nature.

2. To cultivate sympathy, which ennobles the nature.

3. To foster firm faith in an overruling power, which brightens life.

4. To have respect unto the harmonies of heaven amid the discords of
earth. (W. Burrows, B. A.)